Non Footy Chat Thread II

[Gronk]

No I am not. 4 in a row or 4 in a calendar year is kind of the same tbh. And it means nothing. Being at the top for longer period, amount of slams, opponents.
Novak's easiest the GOAT

OK then. Novak Djokovic gets the Greatest Tennis Player Of All Time (just not on clay) Award.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I am stuck painting a bullnose on a hot Sunday.

Vulgar euphemism

 

[hindy111]

OK then. Novak Djokovic gets the Greatest Tennis Player Of All Time (just not on clay) Award.

Peanut

 

[strider]

 

[Gary Gutful]

f**k of merkin. No more invites on my end after your sinking craft beers while I am stuck painting a bullnose on a hot Sunday.

I appreciate being invited on your end, but regretfully I can't attend.

 

[Gary Gutful]

If Djokovic was as good as you say, then he'd have won a calendar slam. Djokovic's first slam final appearance was 2007.

Crickets in the French. Not good enough merkin. Flat track bully.

View attachment 69917

Two french is still impressive. 1 more than Federer. Same amount of runner ups as well. I think he will become the GOAT by the time he is done. Arguably is already.

My read of your shitty wiki image is that he is the second best clay court specialist since 2008, behind the greatest ever.

You just analed yourself.

 

[Gronk]

Two french is still impressive. 1 more than Federer. Same amount of runner ups as well. I think he will become the GOAT by the time he is done. Arguably is already.

My read of your shitty wiki image is that he is the second best clay court specialist since 2008, behind the greatest ever.

You just analed yourself.

Context merkin. The claim is the Djokovic is THE greatest tennis player EVER. The matrix the Djokovic fans use is that he won the most. However is that the sole determinant here ?

It’s like claiming that Fred Rubble is the Greatest Surfer Ever, yet his performance in big wave tournaments is OK or as you say “impressive”. However Fred is certainly not as dominant as Larry Longboard who in his shorter career, won everything in all conditions when he did compete.

I think the Djokovic fans are applying quantity over quality.

 

[hindy111]

I appreciate being invited on your end, but regretfully I can't attend.

Draw up a list of suburbs. Stay atleast 3km radius from me

 

[hindy111]

Context merkin. The claim is the Djokovic is THE greatest tennis player EVER. The matrix the Djokovic fans use is that he won the most. However is that the sole determinant here ?

It’s like claiming that Fred Rubble is the Greatest Surfer Ever, yet his performance in big wave tournaments is OK or as you say “impressive”. However Fred is certainly not as dominant as Larry Longboard who in his shorter career, won everything in all conditions when he did compete.

I think the Djokovic fans are applying quantity over quality.

The time period dominant = 15yrs
Great players in era =Rafa & Federer ( Quality enough )
Slams won = 23?
Ease of wins? He wins slams barely dropping a set.

You lost the argument. Take your bat and ball and f**k of

 

[Gronk]

The time period dominant = 15yrs
Great players in era =Rafa & Federer ( Quality enough )
Slams won = 23?
Ease of wins? He wins slams barely dropping a set.

You lost the argument. Take your bat and ball and f**k of

You just confirmed the quantity over quality premise.

Is the best ever over all surfaces ? No.

Has he ever won the calendar slam ? No.

Is he the greatest modern era player ? Probably yes.

Is the greatest ever ? No.

 

[Gary Gutful]

You just confirmed the quantity over quality premise.

Is the best ever over all surfaces ? No.

Has he ever won the calendar slam ? No.

Is he the greatest modern era player ? Probably yes.

Is the greatest ever ? No.

Who's the best over all surfaces? Nadal?

 

[Gronk]

Who's the best over all surfaces? Nadal?

Modern era or all time ?

 

[hindy111]

Who's the best over all surfaces? Nadal?

DJOKOVIC

 

[hindy111]

You just confirmed the quantity over quality premise.

Is the best ever over all surfaces ? No.

Has he ever won the calendar slam ? No.

Is he the greatest modern era player ? Probably yes.

Is the greatest ever ? No.

Not at all. I showed the quality = Federer and Nadal. Top 5 of all time.
I showed time frame he dominated = That means more players tried to knock him off his perch but unable to.


Winning a calendar slam could be circumstances. You could just play great for 12mths or opponents could play bad. Only a DOPE or a PEANUT would use that in the argument for GOAT. Its a gimmick. Like the DALLY M. Best player for one year.

Also look at numbers. The higher the population the more the competition and people playing. How many played at a high level when Rod Laver was around? Nowhere near as many.

These are facts really. You unfortunately are wrong . Accept it.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Modern era or all time ?

Let’s stick with modern era.

 

[Gary Gutful]

DJOKOVIC

Compared to Nadal and Federer, yes. If we ran stats I suspect he has superior wins and runner ups in 3 of the majors and is second to Nadal in the French.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Actually, maybe Federer has better stats at Wimbledon? Can someone check? I have to go to a meeting FFS!

 

[Gronk]

Let’s stick with modern era.

OK so we are clear, we are no longer talking about the best ever tennis player.

Who is the best modern era player across all surfaces ?

It's generally considered that Ivan Lendl was the most consistent modern player across all surfaces. This is because he consistently preformed well across all surfaces at all times.

Borg has to be considered close to Lendl as the best across all surfaces.

Federer was dominant over hard court and grass.

Samprass was the king of grass.

Djokovic is the king of the hard court. Jimmy Connors says hi. I would have loved to see them two play each other.

Nadal is the king of clay.

McEnroe was the king of indoor.

 

[T.S Quint]

I'm getting sick of all the 'GOAT' arguments. Does it matter?
I used to like arguments like this but these days I just start to get bored with it all.

The Jordan/LeBron debate is the most boring and insignificant argument ever. It doesn't matter who was better. It doesn't matter who I think is better, nor does it matter who you think is better. People get angry over these arguments when everyone can have their own opinion.

Also we are humans and find it hard to separate our love or dislike of a certain player from their achievements. I don't like Djokovic. I will find any reason to not think he is the best all time player (which I'm guessing is what Gronk is doing right now) despite the fact that if I really liked him as a person then I would claim him as the best easily. The amount of people I see on chat pages downplaying LeBron James' achievements because they don't like him or just don't want people to say he's better than Jordan is absurd (I'm a Jordan fan by the way).

 

[Gronk]

I'm getting sick of all the 'GOAT' arguments. Does it matter?
I used to like arguments like this but these days I just start to get bored with it all.

The Jordan/LeBron debate is the most boring and insignificant argument ever. It doesn't matter who was better. It doesn't matter who I think is better, nor does it matter who you think is better. People get angry over these arguments when everyone can have their own opinion.

Also we are humans and find it hard to separate our love or dislike of a certain player from their achievements. I don't like Djokovic. I will find any reason to not think he is the best all time player (which I'm guessing is what Gronk is doing right now) despite the fact that if I really liked him as a person then I would claim him as the best easily. The amount of people I see on chat pages downplaying LeBron James' achievements because they don't like him or just don't want people to say he's better than Jordan is absurd (I'm a Jordan fan by the way).

You think that me saying that he's the the greatest player of the modern era, just not of all time is because I don't like him ?